Education Inequality among Different Social Groups

IF 0.7 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS Hacienda Publica Espanola-Review of Public Economics Pub Date : 2016-06-01 DOI:10.7866/HPE-RPE.16.2.1
Kaname Miyagishima
{"title":"Education Inequality among Different Social Groups","authors":"Kaname Miyagishima","doi":"10.7866/HPE-RPE.16.2.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, we study an education-planning problem by using a mechanism design approach. We consider a model where agents have different abilities in acquiring education and belong to different social groups (for instance, races or genders). Under the information constraint that the abilities of agents are unobservable but group memberships are observable, we derive two sets of education policies derived under Rawlsian and utilitarian social welfare functions. Our main results show that the utilitarian planner does not discriminate agents by their social group membership, while the Rawlsian planner provides a form of affirmative action policy. We also study second-best optimal education policies in the case of general degrees of inequality aversion. In this case, it is shown that affirmative action is not necessarily supported, and the differences in education levels are determined by the agents’ marginal effects of utility to their group’s aggregated welfare.","PeriodicalId":48669,"journal":{"name":"Hacienda Publica Espanola-Review of Public Economics","volume":"260 1","pages":"11-35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hacienda Publica Espanola-Review of Public Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7866/HPE-RPE.16.2.1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In this paper, we study an education-planning problem by using a mechanism design approach. We consider a model where agents have different abilities in acquiring education and belong to different social groups (for instance, races or genders). Under the information constraint that the abilities of agents are unobservable but group memberships are observable, we derive two sets of education policies derived under Rawlsian and utilitarian social welfare functions. Our main results show that the utilitarian planner does not discriminate agents by their social group membership, while the Rawlsian planner provides a form of affirmative action policy. We also study second-best optimal education policies in the case of general degrees of inequality aversion. In this case, it is shown that affirmative action is not necessarily supported, and the differences in education levels are determined by the agents’ marginal effects of utility to their group’s aggregated welfare.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同社会群体之间的教育不平等
本文用机制设计方法研究了一个教育规划问题。我们考虑一个模型,其中代理在获得教育方面具有不同的能力,并且属于不同的社会群体(例如,种族或性别)。在个体能力不可观察而群体成员可观察的信息约束下,我们推导出罗尔斯式和功利主义社会福利函数下的两套教育政策。我们的主要研究结果表明,功利主义的计划者不会因社会群体成员而歧视行为主体,而罗尔斯的计划者则提供了一种平权行动政策。我们还研究了在一般程度的不平等厌恶情况下的次优教育政策。在这种情况下,研究表明,平权行动不一定得到支持,教育水平的差异是由代理人对其群体总福利的效用边际效应决定的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Hacienda Publica Espanola-Review of Public Economics
Hacienda Publica Espanola-Review of Public Economics Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Finance
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Hacienda Pública Española/Review of Public Economics welcomes submissions on all areas of public economics. We seek to publish original and innovative research, applied and theoretical, related to the economic analysis of Government intervention. For example, but not exclusively: Taxation, Redistribution, Health, Education, Pensions, Governance, Fiscal Policy and Fiscal Federalism. In addition to regular submissions, the journal welcomes submissions of: -Survey Reviews, containing surveys of the literature regarding issues of interest in the Public Economics field; -Policy oriented reviews, showing the current contributions of Public Economics in relation to relevant contemporary issues affecting public decision-makers in the real world (Policy Watch); -Comments of previously published articles. Contributions to this section should be limited to a maximum of 2 000 words (12 pages). If deemed adequate, the authors of the commented article will be given the opportunity to react in a Reply. Both Comment and Reply will be published together. Articles for the Survey Reviews and Policy Watch section are subject to the same double blind reviwing procedure. The adequacy of Comments submitted for publication will be evaluated by the Executive Editors.
期刊最新文献
The Relationship between Public Expenditure and Private Investment in Developed and Developing Economies: Policy Implications Based on the Difference The Case for Uniform Commodity Taxation: A Tax Reform Approach Real Estate in a Post-Pandemic World: How Can Policies Make Housing More Enviromentally Sustainable and Affordable? Centrality and Capital Costs in Urban Areas: Policy Watch for Spain Did the Euro Really Increase Corruption in the Eurozone? A Counterfactual Analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1